You Ask, We Answer

First Contact HR staff answers common questions we get on background checks, drug testing and other HR industry practices. Got a question? Ask us at info@FirstContactHR.com

Question #7: What is a Chain of Custody and why is it Important?

This is the detailed documentation of the drug screening process, which accounts for the integrity of each step of the procedure, by tracking the handling and storage of the specimen from collection to disposal.

This multi-part medical document, with assigned barcode numbers, facilitates the process and documents by whom, when and for what purpose the specimen was handled. Clinical labs will not proceed with a drug screen if they recognize the chain of custody has been broken. With a fully executed Chain of Custody, the drug screen result is completely and legally defensible.

For more questions and answers, visit www.FirstContactHR.com and just Ask!

 

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

Pepsi Beverages pays $3.1M to Settle Discrimination Charges

PepsiCo Inc.’s bottling unit, Pepsi Beverages, has agreed to settle federal racial-discrimination charges as well as pledged to provide job training and new roles, according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

PepsiCo Inc. provided a statement that said the EEOC did not find any intentional discrimination. However, the company’s former criminal background check policy disproportionately barred approximately 300 black job applicants from employment. The EEOC, which enforces employment discrimination laws, said in a release that based on an investigation, “found reasonable cause to believe” that PepsiCo Inc.’s former criminal background check policy discriminated against black people.

The former policy and practice exercised by the company used the checks to screen out job applicants who had arrest records – even if they were never convicted of a crime. The policy resulted in limiting job opportunities for minorities, who statistically have higher arrest rates than whites.

The monetary settlement is being allocated in part to the claims process but primarily to division amongst black applicants for new positions at Pepsi. The company has also agreed to submit regular reports to the EEOC on its hiring process and offer anti-discrimination training to hiring managers.

Read EEOC press release: http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/1-11-12a.cfm

 

HR Professional Opinion:

(The comments below are part of First Contact HR’s opinion column where we offer the writer’s opinion on this post’s specific topic and thus should not be taken as legal advice.)

While it is unfortunate, PepsiCo Inc. was faced with claims of discrimination; it is commendable that the company has recognized its discriminatory policy and is taking steps towards creating a more diverse work environment. In the case of hiring, the EEOC clearly states: “There is no Federal law that clearly prohibits an employer from asking about arrest and conviction records. However, using such records as an absolute measure to prevent an individual from being hired could limit the employment opportunities of some protected groups and thus cannot be used in this way.”

Pepsi overlooked this guideline, which could have been avoided had their HR department worked with a background screening company that could make sure their screening policies were aligned with the EEOC guidelines. Pepsi’s former policy not only limited employment opportunities for minorities by considering arrest records as a component of background screening, it also failed to take into consideration the applicant’s arrest as it related to the specific job.

First Contact HR advises its clients to only consider criminal conviction records that are job related before taking any adverse action against job candidates. Further, First Contact HR recommends employers always exercise good judgment and proposes the following ten (10) criteria for employers to consider when criminal record hits are discovered in background screening reports:

  1. The nature, extent and seriousness of the conduct /conviction;
  2. The circumstances surrounding the conduct;
  3. The frequency of the conduct;
  4. How recently the conduct occurred;
  5. The individual’s age and maturity at the time of the conduct;
  6. The presence or absence of rehabilitation and other pertinent behavior changes;
  7. The potential for pressure, coercion, exploitation, or duress;
  8. The likelihood of continuation of the conduct;
  9. How, and if, the conduct bears upon potential job responsibilities; and
  10. The individual’s employment history before and after the conduct.

 

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

Juaniata College Conducted Background Check, Sandusky Denied Job

After applying to a volunteer coaching position in May 2010 at Juaniata College in Huntingdon, PA, college officials who did their due-diligence turned Jerry Sandusky down. Hiring personnel at the college denied Sandusky the position after conducting a background investigation and were made aware of the ex-Penn State assistant coach’s alleged improper behavior at a previous school.

Sandusky is currently at the forefront of a sexual abuse scandal, where he is being charged with 40 counts of molestation charges towards young boys over a 15-year period.

Although he failed a background check and was told by the Pennsylvania college’s administrators that they did not want him associated with their sports program, Sandusky still managed to serve as a “consultant.” Read more

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

Background Screening and Minors, Concerned Parents

In light of the events that have unfolded at Penn State and Syracuse Universities, it is important to recognize the unfortunate events that occurred, but also shed light on how the scandals happened. The incident has shocked the country – Penn State University’s former football coach, Jerry Sandusky is being charged with 40 counts of sexual abuse towards minors and the university’s revered football coach, Joe Paterno was fired.

Sandusky is the pinpoint in a wide-ranging investigation that involves eight boys over a 15-year period. Similarly, Syracuse University authorities allegedly ignored sex abuse allegations in 2002 against basketball coach Bernie Fine. A former ball boy for Syracuse University, Bobby Davis, and his girlfriend at the time, claim to have gone to university police back in 2002 with child-molestation allegations. The two have decided to come forward again in response to the media spectacle at Penn State – this time, hoping they will be heard.

The allegations facing administrators at both universities are cause for any parent or school to worry especially when the trust and care of minors are involved. The reaction to these two events by parents is overwhelming – many are questioning the hiring process for the administrators, teachers, coaches and the like who spend time with children. The incidents that have occurred also highlight the lack of background checks performed on individuals who work closely with children.

In one case, a group of parents whose children participate in Baltimore County Department of Recreation and Parks programs are demanding the adoption of background checks for all coaches and volunteers (Read more). In another recent case, Hollywood casting assistant, Jason James Murphy has caused anxiety amongst the parents of child actors who worked under Murphy. Murphy is a convicted child molester who served five years in prison for kidnapping and molesting an 8 year old boy. Parents of child actors are especially concerned since the casting process is typically a time where a child would be unsupervised by a parent or guardian (Read more).

Had background checks including federal court criminal records searches, statewide criminal records searches and criminal history reports, been performed some of these events could have been avoided. It is important to question whether or not background checks are performed amongst those our society trusts with minors to help eliminate the chances of pedophiles and predators preying on children.

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

Win a FCHR Prize Pack on Facebook!

First Contact HR wants to give our fans and Mailing List subscibers the chance to win a gift!

Click “Like” at facebook.com/firstcontacthr and then join our mailing list for a chance to win a Prize Pack from First Contact HR!

Givaway starts Friday, October 28, 2011 12:00AM EST and ends Friday, November 18, 2011 11:59PM EST

The Prize pack includes office supplies and the following First Contact HR branded merchandise:

  • Polo Shirt – one (1)
  • Water Bottle – one (1)
  • Various desk supplies (may include any mixture of the following: letter opener, notebook, pen, planner, folder, post it notes booklet, leather-bound pad and pen, etc.)

ENTER NOW!

Before entering, read official contest

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

Retailers use Background Checks as a way to Keep Employees and Shoppers Safe

According to a recent survey conducted by the National Retail Federation (NRF), approximately 97 percent of all retailers in the U.S. utilize background screening procedures in the hiring process.

Retailers know the importance of keeping their employees and customers safe, which is why they use different types of background screening components, including checking criminal, credit, motor vehicle/driving records, as well as drug history, social security number traces, and education and identity verifications.

The findings released by the NRF were based upon a survey of 96 individual retail and restaurant companies. “Nearly all retailers polled (96.6%) utilize background screening as part of their applicant hiring process.”

Download the complete PDF

For information on the background screening services First Contact HR can provide in the retail space, click here.

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

What do Criminal Background Checks Mean For Minority Job Candidates?

The national unemployment rate in the U.S. is declining, but still currently rests at an unsettling 9.1% – a decrease from 9.6% this time last year. In light of the quest for jobs in the current economy, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) wants to make it easier for the nation’s minority job prospects by limiting (or even eliminating) the use of criminal background checks for employers when it comes to making hiring decisions. The commission held hearings to examine employer’s use of conviction and arrest records as a potential hiring barrier.

The EEOC argues that by limiting the ability of employers to consider criminal backgrounds check employment screening tool in hiring will allow for minority applicants, specifically African Americans and Latinos to get more jobs since the two groups have the highest conviction and arrest rates as compared to non-minorities.

The U.S. Commission of Civil Rights (USCCR) however, negates the EEOC’s claims since the hearings failed to recognize scholarly reports that challenge the assumptions that African Americans are less likely to be hired when employers use criminal background checks.

In research cited by [Caroline May, The Daily Caller]:

Civil Rights Commissioners Peter Kirsanow, Gail Heriot and Todd Gaziano pointed to research from economists Harry Holzer and Stephen Rafael and public policy professor Michael Stoll, published in the Journal of Law and Economics, which showed that employers with access to background checks are actually more likely to hire African Americans, especially African American men, than those without access to that information.

According to the research, when a criminal background check is unavailable, some employers have been known to be more prone to discriminate against minorities like African Americans and Latinos based on crime statistics. Currently, the EEOC is still reviewing the statements by the USCCR.

 

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

Internet Background Searches – Should YOU Use Them?

It’s no surprise that basically anyone and everyone can conduct a simple background check on whoever they like. With companies like EasyBackrgoundCheck.com and nationally-recognized BeenVerified.com, individuals and companies can input basic information about a person and obtain “background” information on that individual.

While it is fine for people to use internet background check services like these for personal use, it is important to realize that these companies are simply “public record aggregators,” and thus not a replacement for traditional pre-employment background screening or private investigative services.

Internet aggregation services are a cheap and quick way to get a bit of information on a stranger or person of interest, but are certainly not acceptable for hiring purposes. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) information that is supplied by a 3rd party vendor for hiring purposes needs to be both accurate and current (not older than seven years). Furthermore, companies and organizations that are in fact going to use the information obtained from these internet aggregation sources for employment purposes, must obtain the applicants consent before doing so. In the case of hiring, the job applicant must provide an organization with signed written consent for performing an internet background check.

Companies and organizations that have written consent from applicants to do a background check still need to make sure that the information is accurate – in many cases, the information is not. BeenVerified.com for example even states: “we do not represent or warrant that the results provided will be 100% accurate and up to date.”

More often than not, those conducting internet background checks via aggregation services are not able find the right person to investigate either because their name is too similar to another person (think, “John Smith”) or the person has taken steps to protect their internet privacy (think, “do not call list”… but more like the “do not internet background check me online list”). How could an individual do this without countless hours spent searching online? You might ask.

Well, there are a number of ways individuals can hide, block and even remove information about them so that internet background check websites cannot find them. Read this article by BGR.com explaining all the ways you can put yourself on the “do not internet background check me online list” for all the major internet aggregation sites such as BeenVerrified.com.

The best practice available for a company or organization that is looking to conduct background checks on job applicants and employees is to use a trusted company such as First Contact HR. To see what background screening services First Contact HR can provide to individuals and companies, Visit: FirstContactHR.com

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon